On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 7:58 PM, Andrew Dunstan <and...@dunslane.net> wrote: > Well, the original code was put in for a reason, presumably that we were > getting some stale data and wanted to exclude it. So I'm unwilling to throw > it out altogether. If someone can propose a reasonable sanity check then I'm > prepared to implement it.
While I generally agree that long-established code shouldn't be changed for light or transient causes, I have to admit I'm pretty skeptical about this particular instance. I can't think of any particularly compelling reason why it's BAD for an old result to show up. We now show the commit ID on the main page, so if you see 512abc4 in the middle of a bunch of ef9ab5f's, you'll notice. And if you don't notice, so what? -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
